Congratulations. Your preferred candidate won a second term as president. I’m sure y’all are too busy dancing in the streets and smilecrying and stuff to be on the Internet right now, but this will be here when all that is done.

Now that Obama has got himself a second term, you and I need to have a chat. I just have a couple questions I need to ask, and then you can be on your merry Democrat way.

Now that this is no longer an “election year,” will you now pay attention to the drone strikes, kill lists, allowance of indefinite detention and mass deportation of undocumented immigrants?

Now that your dude has won, will you look critically at his connections to the parasitic financial institutions that sent our economy spiraling out of control in 2008?

Now that there will never be another Obama campaign, will you protest with us against all of the above?

Or will you stay home, wring your hands and sit there looking worried that your friends won’t like you anymore if you speak out against all of these things, things that people in other countries are justifiably mad at? Will you still call people who protest these things impractical, “emotional progressives,” or worse?

Will you sit there, pensively waiting for Obama to become the man he promised he would be in 2008?

Here’s a hint: he won’t.

You don’t have to be an anarchist to see that the man you elected, while ostensibly “better” in a couple of arguably important ways than the man he was running against, is still no one to write home about. The “lesser evil” is still evil.

All we are asking is that you remove your head from your collective behind and, at the very least, help us make sure that his evil doesn’t grow.

You don’t need Adbusters to tell you to take to the streets. Just do it.

42 comments

What about my family, would be left alone to die? THE VOTE is worth NOTHING! For over 10 Yrs"THEY"have failed to Help & Protect my family, killing us slowly! http://youtu.be/IR7b6uiofjg #Respect #Solidarity Plz read @pradera123

Spiraling out of control in 2008? The economy was in a downward spiral before Obama came into office. No one can fix the economy in 4 years. Obama has not done the job we hoped he would in restoring the economy but it is getting better and the policies Mitt Romney would have enforced would not have restored the economy. Evil? That is a strong word. If you think Obama is "evil" than what do you think about any other candidate? Evil implies people like Hitler. I hardly imagine the word evil as one who is doing everything he can to help millions of people.

The author does not blame Obama for the economy spiraling out of control in 2008. He blames the Wall Street banks when he refers to "parasitic financial institutions." Obama has appointed high ranking members of these institutions to major offices, subsidized these institutions, and received campaign money from these institutions.

Regarding Obama being "one who is doing everything he can to help millions of people", I would suggest you look into the many people who are being harmed by Obama. He has deported over a million immigrants. The families broken up there have not been helped. He has used drone strikes, and sometimes even cluster bombs, to kill large numbers of civilians. The victims of these strikes have not been helped.

The "economy" wasn't even a talking point in 2008 except with Ron Paul. No one else thought we were in a housing bubble at the time. No Obama promised to close GitMo, promised to get out of Afganistan. Remember the "you can take that to the bank" qoute? Change you can believe in…. Lol.. The only change from GW's policies is more outrageous. Gitmo4ever, Increased troops in Afganistan, shutting down whistle blowers including Manning and going after Julian Assange, escalation of drone strikes, kill lists, killing American citizens without a trial, NDAA, Libya, Syria, soon Iran? That is evil. You only know about Hitler what the state sponsored school taught you. Hitler built the German economy, and infrastructure. He was for the German people and against the bankers. For the country and against the corporations. Unlike both George Bush and Obama. They have killed 10’s of 1000’s but not to the betterment of us the people! No not to make the US a better place. It all for other reasons. They could have spent the trillions on the US people instead of a war for other interests.

How is $3 dollar bread and $4 gasoline helping this economy? How is free phones and more people on food stamps and welfare helping this economy? Because someone has to work to pay for these things. Are you a worker or another taker? I guess we won't know what Romney could have done to help or hurt as we are all going to find out more of what Obama and his Brotherhood have in store for America. Go bury your collective head back in each others backside and get ready for your turn in line for the worst is yet to come. No worries for Obama for another term. But I guess with his mighty pen he will just sign another executive order to give himself all the terms and years he want. God help us all

I think anyone who has the blood of tens of thousands of innocent people on his hands via "counterinsurgency war" and drone murders, who enables warrantless surveillance, who refuses to end extraordinary rendition, and who uses arbitrary executive decree to put the communications system under totalitarian copyright lockdown in cahoots with his friends at the RIAA and MPAA, is EVIL. That's E, V, I, L.

How many people would I have to murder with robot planes, as a private citizen, before you called me evil? Same standard applies to POTUS.

For the record, I also think Bush II, Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, etc., etc., ad nauseam, were evil. I think Romney might have been even more evil if he'd been elected.

Joe – Yes, Obama is evil just as his predecessor was evil. What part of daily drone murders in Yemen, Somalia, Pakistan, Syria, and Afghanistan are not evil? What part of quadrupling the troops in Afghanistan is not evil? What part of replacing troops in Iraq with contractors (i.e. paid mercenaries) is not evil? What part of murdering hundreds and possibly thousands of innocent Mexicans from Fast And Furious is not evil? What part of signing NDAA and resigning the Patriot Act is not evil? What part of expanding facilities at club gitmo not evil? So please tell me what part of being a mass murderer is not evil?

If Obama had any thought to actually helping people, he'd talk about cutting regulation rather than increasing it, of cutting taxes rather than raising them, of cutting spending rather than always ALWAYS talking about making the problems worse.

The original post was an appeal to at least *try* to prevent Obama from being even worse than he was in his first term. Are we going to say, “Well, he only murdered …” vs Bush vs Hitler? If it was your family’s wedding that was hit by the drone in Pakistan, or was blown to bits by a cluster bomb in Libya, he is evil. When he decided YOU did not have the right to a trial, or even a charge before being ‘disappeared’ (NDAA), he put himself in the same category as Pinochet – brought to power by Dr. Kissinger and the CIA on 9-11-1973. When Obama filled his foreign policy positions with Rockefeller people, well, don’t believe me – here is Obama’s own man, in his own words:

“Thank you for that wonderful tribute to Henry Kissinger yesterday. … As the most recent National Security Advisor of the United States, I take my daily orders from Dr. Kissinger, filtered down through General Brent Scowcroft and Sandy Berger, who is also here. We have a chain of command in the National Security Council that exists today.”

Same Mass Murdering Scum, Different Day. Same Elite families running the show who don’t give a damn if you die a miserable death. It is best to keep that in mind, rather than ‘picking favorites’ among thieving murderers.

The corporate control of society and government is not in question at all. What I'm taking issue with is the elitist "holier that tho" tone of this author. Allowing this type of devising thinking into the leadership of the progressive movement is leading to the slow unraveling of what should be a steady growing of progressive ideas. While it's likely that 70% of citizens feel the Banks are taking advantage of our system we are unable to grow a truly anti-wall street movement. It's the divisive rants like the one from this author that IMHO are a major cause of our lackluster growth.

"The original post was an appeal to at least *try* to prevent Obama from being even worse than he was in his first term"

Granting that there are limitations on the positive impact that Obama will have in American society, one wonders why you haven't realized that YOUR ability to create change is completely meaningless beside the actual changed caused by this election. I mean, are you seriously delusional enough to believe that writing a 1000 word post counts as an attempt to do anything?! No wonder you dismiss the relief of those people (especially gays, women, and POC) whose rights will not be completely trampled if the incoming election results were different–you are clearly suffering from fits of grandeur at your own causal power. Keep up the good work though, preaching to the choir sure is a thankless and worthwhile job!

Also: hahaha at the implication that only people who are stupid enough to ignore election results can engage in protest. Fuck you.

The recent vote resulted in the re-election of the incumbent President of the United States. Now maybe you think narrowly maintaining the same status-quo composition of the governing party in Washington is a good thing. Maybe the alternative would have been far worse. But for better or for worse, very narrowly managing to keep the same people in power for the next 4 years who have been in power for the last 4 years is hardly an example of making social "change," unless the word "change" has simlpy been revised to mean "Whatever outcome seems most preferable to voting Progressives," whether this actually involves moving one way, or moving another, or staying in exactly the same place as you've been for the last 4 years.

"Granting that there are limitations on the positive impact that Obama will have in American society"

Who is talking about "limitations on the positive impact Obama will have"? Hultner listed four specific "impacts" of Obama's government which have been unrelentingly negative, not a "limited positive impact" but actually actively making things worse — and (1) his repeated bailouts of failed financial corporations and the incestuous relationship between his cabinet and major Wall Street firms; (2) Obama's constant lethal "impacts" on several different Muslim countries with drone missile strikes; (3) his ongoing imprisonment and torture of a whistleblower (who happens to be gay) for exposing the full extent of (1); (4) his deportation of over 1,000,000 undocumented immigrants during his first term, making him numerically the single most destructive President in American history for undocumented families. If this is not an example of people's rights being well and completely trampled, I don't know what in the world would be. By any standard of justice, compassion or simple decency his record has been appalling.
My recent post Election Results

@Jarrod This idiocy astounds me. There are a number of judgmental biases apparent in your rant; One wonders why you can't understand that a person can and did actually ABSTAIN from voting, feel a sense of relief after learning the results, despite having not participated, for the precise reason that one has realized the individual's impotence in the face of creating meaningful change. What a callous analysis you have presented.
Your accusations of fits of grandeur regarding causal power are based on a false premise.
Perhaps you missed the point entirely. The effort is not aimed at "preaching to the choir," it is aimed at expressing honestly without alienating those who might otherwise turn away at the very mention of some negative obama-fact (an experience I personally have endured thousands of times in the past few weeks, and an experience I'm sure you've sequestered yourself from entirely). Sometimes motives for writing go beyond thanks and praise…sometimes the motive arises from deep frustration and a feeling of needing to speak the truth in those very times when it is most difficult to do so, even knowing the audience surrounding you will certainly rebuke the piece as total trash. One writes a 1000 word post because it needs to be said. You don't feel sure that you can ever or will ever make a difference, but you know what you believe and you know what you need to express.
Here, one says that Obama is a minor relief, even if one didn't necessarily vote for him. But one also emphasizes a DESPERATION to express freely your laundry list of criticisms against him. One also seeks not to alienate those who might otherwise gravitate towards the writing with some modicum of sympathy. You are clearly a man prone so deeply to in group/out group psychological biases that you cannot understand the nuances of a situation requiring a person to be honest and forthright, while not alienating the audience.
But you seem the type to reject and judge far too readily. You value ideas over human kinship (ideas which aren't even contradictory, except perhaps with respect to optimism versus pessimism regarding direct and collective action efficacy).

I like to believe an author can try to maneuver his way through earnest and heartfelt writing without betraying himself or alienating his companions. Or I'd like to believe that such an effort is at least a noble one…

Anyone can engage in protest. I don't see the implication you speak of? I see despair; a sensibility based upon the assumption that elections promote persons into positions of power, which entrench them in systems so deeply dysfunctional that they cannot, even if somehow they magically retain their idealism, DREAM of enacting real change. And personally, I sympathize with persons who ignore election results, they strike me as meaningless in many ways. Having not voted but feeling a twinge of relief, I feel I speak from a legitimate place, you see. 😉

You must learn that some people aren't motivated my direct action change; they are motivated by intellectual expression that is colored by deeply heartfelt beliefs about society and its organization. They do not write these missives for validation (I'm certain they receive very little), instead they write them because they feel compelled towards self -expression. They do not delve further into action-based efforts because those efforts (for me at least) often emanate futility, and, on occasion, as with occupy and others, express outright cruelty and rejection.

I've never written something i didn't fully believe in. I can' t imagine why someone writing for an anarchist based forum would choose to write that unless it reflected their true convictions.

one question: if you were to have it your way with this author? What would you rather see them do?

I'm guessing that the gays, women, people of color, etc. and who are going to continue to be trampled upon, exploited, oppressed, bombed, tortured, murdered, jailed, and so on as a result of Obama's policies — who just happen to be NOT AMERICAN — count for nothing in your calculus?

As another C4SS commentator noted, the winner of this election was predetermined. George W. Bush won. And OBTW did you miss the point about mass-murderer monster Kissinger *still* calling the tune? I guess since he and O-bomb-ya are both in the ludicrous Nobel "peace" prize club it's all fine.
My recent post Blowing up my notebook with Xubuntu, full-disk encryption, mdadm and LVM

stumbled upon your site will be visiting often. Problem with most Americans is that they think that they got all the rights they are told they have been given, what a laugh. Even us in poverty-stricken Africa have more insight than most of the black shepherd's followers. Keep up the good work.

Most believe they have rights. I believe I have "rights" in quotes and have no illusions about their inevitable transience. I do, however, believe we should have rights. And when I mention rights, I usually do so in the context of liberties I feel I should be afforded, rather than am necessarily and irrevocably going to be afforded.
George Carlin's last bit ever before he died was called "you have no rights"

Prodhoun: …in democracy, which according to the authors exists fully only at the moment of elections…This moment once past, democracy retreats; it withdraws into itself again, and begins its anti-democratic work. It becomes AUTHORITY. http://robertgraham.wordpress.com/2009/04/04/prou…

@ Jarrod: There was no *significant* change in this ‘election’ – that was the point of my comment (I’m not the O.P., btw) – and why I added the supporting material to prove it beyond all doubt. Either ‘potential president’ would have placed representatives of the same powers-that-be (banksters, oil, war, food-gmo) to continue the same game. The duopoly creates and trades ‘wedge-issues’ to keep the game ‘looking competitive’; but that is obvious to any careful reader of history, right?

That said, I do agree with the sentiment of the O.P., in that I hope the people of good-conscience on the ‘left’ will stop self-censoring and playing the ‘defend the wedge-issue’ game – chased around by a ‘Count-Chocula Romeny’ – just as the ‘religious’ folks are chased about by ‘Franken-Berry-Hillary’ – right back to the ‘center’ of the ‘Statist-Gameboard’.

Spend under one minute to watch as they openly laugh at how easily wedge-believers such as youself are fooled: